Von der Verrechtlichung zur Vervölkerrechtlichung?

In its jurisprudence, the German Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) has consistently tried to develop specific constitutional requirements in a way that limits and structures law-making as a political process. In dealing with public international law, the BVerfG has repeatedly categorised certain constitutional core elements as part of the constitutional identity of the German Basic Law, thereby limiting the German constitution's openness towards international law. In its recent decision regarding climate change, however, the BVerfG draws on international treaty law in interpreting the relevant constitutional standards, namely Article 20a GG. This article examines whether this emphasis on the constitutional significance of international law in the context of climate change amounts to a change of paradigm in light of the previous case law of the BVerfG. After discussing the scope of the openness towards international law according to the case law of the BVerfG, the article analyses the provision of Article 20a GG which is in need of concretisation and clarification. While the BVerfG, in the context of its recent decision on climate change, includes international law in the interpretation of Article 20a GG and therefore emphasises its international dimension, this article argues that the court does not incorporate norms of international law to demonstrate its openness to international law. Rather, it tries to equate international law with German constitutional law and thereby qualifies these international norms as a constitutional standard enabling itself to carry out constitutional review in this matter.